List the apps tracked on this account, optionally filtered by platform.
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "list_tracked_apps"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| platform | No | Optional. Omit to list both platforms. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, but the verb 'List' strongly implies a read-only operation. The description mentions no side effects or mutations, which is appropriate for a listing tool.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, concise sentence that includes all necessary information without any extraneous words. It is well-structured and immediately understandable.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple list operation with one optional parameter, the description is complete. It specifies the resource scope and the filter, and there is no output schema to describe, so nothing is missing.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The description directly explains the only parameter ('platform') and its optional nature, matching the schema. Since the schema provides the enum values, the description adds just enough context without redundancy.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the action ('List'), the resource ('apps tracked on this account'), and the optional filter ('by platform'). It is unambiguous and distinct from sibling tools which focus on other resources.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description explicitly mentions the optional platform filter, telling the agent when to use it. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings, but since all siblings are getters for different resources, the intended usage is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.